Professional Documents
Culture Documents
by
Jerry Tempalski
The OTA Papers series is an occasional series of reports on the research, models, and datasets
developed to inform and improve Treasury=s tax policy analysis. The papers are works in
progress and subject to revision. Views and opinions expressed are those of the authors and do
not necessarily represent official Treasury positions or policy. OTA Papers are distributed in
order to document OTA analytic methods and data and invite discussion and suggestions for
revision and improvement. Comments are welcome and should be directed to the authors.
I am grateful to Robert Carroll, Lowell Dworin, Laura Kalambokidis, David Richardson, and
Karl Scholz for their comments and to Kevin Morris and Anona Samuel for their research
assistance. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily
represent the views of the U.S. Treasury Department.
ABSTRACT
Since 1940 many major tax bills have been enacted. This paper uses revenue estimates
of each bill to create consistent measures of the relative size of the several dozen major tax bills
The Revenue Act of 1942 was the biggest tax increase (and biggest tax bill) of the 1940-
1967 period; the Revenue Act of 1945 was the biggest tax cut of that period. The Economic
Recovery Tax Act of 1981 was the biggest tax cut (and biggest tax bill) of the 1968-2003 period;
the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 was the biggest tax increase of that period.
Jerry Tempalski
Office of Tax Analysis
Room 4108, Main Treasury Building
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20220
JERRY.TEMPALSKI@DO.TREAS.GOV
REVENUE EFFECTS OF MAJOR TAX BILLS
Since the federal income tax was significantly expanded in 1940, several dozen major tax
bills have been enacted. Inevitably, discussions (and disagreements) have arisen concerning the
relative size of the bills= effects on federal revenues.1 This paper uses revenue estimates from
Treasury and the Joint Committee on Taxation to compare the relative size of the revenue effect
of the major tax bills enacted after 1939 using four different measures. An appendix provides a
The paper divides the post-1939 years into two periods, 1940-1967 and 1968-2003. The
comparison of tax bills for the first period should be examined with some caution, because the
revenue estimates are from different sources and are not completely consistent. The comparison
for the second period can be viewed with more confidence, because the estimates are relatively
consistent.
Comparing the size of the revenue effects of tax bills sounds like a relatively easy
exercise. But because the available data are not necessarily consistent and because there are
several ways of measuring the revenue effects of tax bills, problems have to be resolved and
choices have to be made before the bills can be compared. Each section discusses some of the
1
See for example, Louis Lyons, ATEFRA >82 vs. OBRA >93: Whose Tax Increase Was Bigger?@
Tax Notes, August 26, 1996, pp. 1098-1099.
2
This paper analyzes each tax bill separately. A bill is analyzed on the basis of exactly
those provisions contained in the bill when the bill was enacted. Bills are not analyzed together,
even if a later bill was primarily designed to offset some of the effect of an earlier bill. For
example, although the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA) was enacted
primarily to offset some of the revenue loss from the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981
(ERTA), the two bills are analyzed as separate bills in this paper.
The four measures used to compare the revenue estimates of the tax bills are:
C current dollars,
The single best measure for most purposes is probably the revenue effect as a percentage
of GDP, because it eliminates the effects of inflation, real economic growth, and the size of total
federal receipts. The second best measure is probably constant dollars, because it eliminates the
1940-1967
Congressional floor discussions indicate that most of the major tax bills in the 1940-1967
period were associated with wars.2 The tax increases in the 1940-1943 period helped pay for the
costs of preparing for, and fighting, World War II. The Revenue Act of 1945 cut taxes in the
2
The Congressional Record contains all Congressional floor discussions.
3
aftermath of World War II. The tax increases in 1950 and 1951 were passed to pay for the
Korean War, and the Tax Adjustment Act of 1966 helped to pay for the Vietnam War.
Methodology - For each tax bill of this period, Treasury and the Joint Committee on
estimates, however, was not available for all bills from this period. For some bills, Treasury
Department estimates were available. For other bills, JCT estimates were available. For still
other bills, the only estimates available were from statements or tables included in the
Congressional Record without a citation for the source of the estimates. For this subsection,
Treasury estimates were used when available. Table 1 notes which estimates are not Treasury
estimates.
For some bills, revenue estimates for the year after enactment were available. For others,
Afull-year effect@ estimates were available. Full-year effect estimates were used when available.
Table 1 notes which estimates are for the year after enactment.
Actual GDP and GDP deflator figures for the year after enactment were used to estimate
a bill=s constant dollar effect and its effect as a percentage of GDP. Similarly, actual federal
revenues for the year after enactment were used to estimate a bill=s effect as a percentage of
federal revenue.
3
Before 1974 the JCT was known as the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation.
4
The two group=s estimates historically are generally close to each other.
4
Results - By all measures, the Revenue Act of 1942 was by far the biggest tax increase of
the period and was also bigger than any tax decrease of the period, making it the biggest tax bill
of the period. (See Table 1 and Figures 1 and 2.) The second biggest tax increase of the period,
measured as a percentage of GDP, was the Revenue Act of 1941. Measured in constant dollars,
however, the Revenue Act of 1951 was the second largest tax increase.
Measured as a percentage of GDP, the Revenue Act of 1945 was the biggest tax cut of
the period, with the Revenue Act of 1948 the second biggest tax cut. Measured in constant
dollars, however, the Revenue Act of 1964 was the biggest tax cut, with the Revenue Act of
1945 second.
1968-2003
The revenue estimates for the bills in the 1968-2003 period suggest that the period can
broken into three subperiods. First, most of the bills enacted before 1982 were tax cuts. During
this period, inflation was relatively high and the individual income tax parameters were not
indexed for inflation. Without indexation, inflation can push taxpayers into higher tax brackets
without any increase in real income. This phenomenon is called bracket creep, and it increases
federal revenue as a percentage of GDP without any legislative action. In fact, when inflation is
relatively high and bracket creep is particularly intense, as it was through much of the 1970's,
policymakers have to cut taxes repeatedly to maintain the desired level of taxes. Of the 9 major
tax bills enacted between 1968 and 1981, 6 reduced federal revenue.
Second, in 1981, ERTA was enacted, which provided for the indexation of the individual
income tax parameters. The combination of indexation and relatively large federal budget
5
deficits helped cause 9 of the 11 major tax bills enacted between 1982 and 1993 to increase
federal revenue.
Third, all 6 of the major tax bills enacted after 1993 have reduced federal revenue, mostly
as a result of soaring federal revenue that pushed the federal budget into surplus for the first time
in many years.
Methodology - For the bills in this period, Treasury Department revenue estimates were
used, because inflation and GDP forecasts consistent with the Treasury estimates were more
readily available than forecasts consistent with the JCT estimates. The estimates are for the
federal government=s fiscal years (July 1-June 30 for 1968-1976, and October 1-September 30
January budget were used.5 6 Treasury produces estimates for a bill when it is enacted, generally
reestimates the bill for the January budget, and sometimes reestimates a bill for several
subsequent budgets. In a few cases, the first post-enactment estimates proved not very accurate.
For example, revenues from the Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax of 1980 were estimated to be $21
5
The first post-enactment January budget for the Consolidated Budget and Reconciliation Act of
1985 (COBRA) did not contain the revenue effect of COBRA. COBRA estimates used in this paper are
from the second post-enactment January budget.
6
Revenue estimates for bills enacted after 1995 were not shown in the January budgets. Except
for the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA), internal Treasury Department
estimates made in conjunction with the first post-enactment budgets are used in this paper. For JGTRRA,
internal Treasury estimates made in conjunction with the first post-enactment midsession review are used.
6
billion in 1984; actual revenues were probably less than $4 billion. This paper makes no
When available, estimates are presented for each of the first 4 fiscal years after
enactment.7 For most years, 4 years of post-enactment estimates were available; for the earliest
years of the period, only 2 years of estimates were available. Annual averages for the first 4
years after enactment and the first 2 years after enactment are also presented.
Constant dollar estimates are first computed based on the calendar year GDP deflator
forecast contained in the same January budget from which the revenue estimates came. Then
these estimates are converted into 1992 dollars based on the actual GDP deflator. Revenue
effects as a percentage of GDP are based on calendar year GDP forecasts from the same January
budget.8 Revenue effects as a percentage of total revenues are based on fiscal year federal
revenue forecasts from the same January budget. The federal receipts forecasts reported in the
budget are reduced by the effect of the enacted bill under analysis and by the effect of
Analyzing tax bills strictly by their revenue estimates can be deceiving for at least three
reasons. First, some tax bills have major provisions that are temporary (e.g., 10-percent income
tax surcharge in the Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968), masking the long-run effect
7
Because all provisions in JGTRRA were effective in the year of enactment, the estimates for
JGTRRA are shown for (1) the four years after enactment, and (2) the year of enactment and the three
years after enactment.
8
The first post-enactment January budgets for the Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968
(RECA) and the Tax Reform Act of 1969 did not contain GDP deflator estimates nor GDP estimates for
the second year after enactment. As a substitute for these missing estimates, the actual figures were used.
7
of the tax bill for the first year or two after enactment. Other tax bills have major provisions that
do not become effective until several years after enactment (e.g., the indexation of individual tax
parameters in ERTA was not effective until 1985), which also prevent the long-term effects of
the tax bill from being seen in the years right after enactment. The estimates presented in this
period include no adjustment to capture the long-run, fully-phased-in effect of the tax bills. With
the sharp increase in the use of sunsets and phase-ins in recent legislation (e.g., Economic
Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA)), it is particularly difficult to
Second, relatively small differences in the effective dates of tax provisions can affect the
revenue estimate for the year after enactment. For bills whose important provisions are effective
before October 1 (the start of the fiscal year) of the year of enactment, the revenue estimate for
the year after enactment will reflect a full year=s economic activity. For bills whose important
provisions are effective after October 1 -- January 1 is the effective date for many provisions --
the first year=s revenue estimate will not reflect a full year=s economic activity. For example, the
individual tax rate cut in ERTA was not effective until January 1, 1982. Thus, the revenue
estimate for fiscal year 1982 only contains a 9-month effect. On the other hand, the individual
tax rate increase in Omnibus Reconciliation Bill of 1993 (OBRA93) was retroactive, so the
Third, government revenue estimates do not take into account the effect of the bills on
GDP, even though some bills (e.g., Tax Reduction Act of 1975) were primarily designed to
8
stimulate the economy.9 The effect of most tax bills on GDP is uncertain, but probably generally
small.10
Results - By every measure used here, ERTA was by far the biggest tax change (and the
biggest tax cut) over the past 35 years. (See Table 2 and Figures 3 and 4.) The revenue effect of
ERTA was more than twice as large (in constant dollars) as any other post-1967 tax bill.
Similarly, the revenue effect of ERTA, measured as a percentage of GDP and as a percentage of
total federal revenue, was more than twice as large as any post-1967 tax bill, except RECA,
which contained a temporary 10-percent income tax surcharge. The second largest tax cut of the
period as a percentage of GDP was the Revenue Act of 1978; the second largest tax cut in
TEFRA was the biggest tax increase of the period measured in constant dollars and as a
percentage of GDP. OBRA93 was the second biggest tax increase measured in constant dollars
9
Indirectly, the revenue estimates in the budget may contain a small GDP effect. If an enacted
bill affects the budget GDP forecast, the revenue estimate for the bill will contain a small GDP effect.
The rest of the tax effect from the GDP effect will show up only as a change in baseline tax receipts.
10
For a discussion on including the effect of tax bills on GDP in government revenue estimates,
see Alan J. Auerbach, ADynamic Revenue Estimates,@ The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Winter
1996, Volume 10, Number 1, pp. 141-157.
9
APPENDIX
This appendix provides a short list of the major provisions in each of the tax bills examined in
this paper. For each bill, the provisions are listed in rough order of their revenue effects, with the
provision with the greatest revenue effect listed first.
For tax bills of the World War II era (1940-1945), the descriptions of the major provisions are
less detailed than the descriptions for other tax bills. The reason for this difference is that the enormous
increase in the need for revenue in that era led to many different types of taxes on individual and
corporate incomes. The interrelationships between these different taxes make it very difficult to briefly
summarize the effects of enacted provisions.11
11
Even before 1940, the Anormal@ individual and corporate tax rates were supplemented with
surtax rates that far exceeded the normal rates. Both the normal and the surtax rates were changed several
times during the 1940-1945 period. In 1940, temporary Adefeat@ tax increases on individual and corporate
incomes were enacted. Also in 1940, an corporate excess profits tax was enacted. In 1942, a AVictory@
tax on individual incomes was enacted. Policy makers were aware of the complications caused by these
different types of taxes and, in several tax bills, attempted to rationalize these different taxes and reduce
the administrative burden on taxpayers. For a summary of income tax rates and exemptions since 1913,
see Joseph A. Pechman, Federal Tax Policy, Fifth Edition, Appendix A, 1987
10
C created new 31% individual tax rate; capped capital gains rate at 28%
C temporarily extended and increased air transportation excise taxes (thru 1995)
C phased-in increase in estate tax exemption equivalent from $600,000 to $1 million in 2006
14
C phased-in lowering of individual tax rates; top tax rate became 35% (thru 2010)
C phased-in increase of estate tax exemption equivalent and repeal of the estate tax (thru 2010)
C increased individual AMT exemption to $49,000 ($35,750) for joint (single) returns (thru 2004)
C created 30% expensing for certain capital asset purchases (thru September 2004)
C extended of exception under Subpart F for active financing income (thru 2006)
TABLE 1 - REVENUE EFFECTS OF MAJOR BILLS ENACTED BETWEEN 1940 AND 1968
1/ Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimate; before 1974, JCT was called Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation
16
Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968 16.0 4.7 N/A N/A 10.4 N/A
Tax Reform Act of 1969 3.8 2.4 N/A N/A 3.1 N/A
Revenue Act of 1971 -4.4 -6.9 N/A N/A -5.7 N/A
Tax Reduction Act of 1975 -9.8 0.4 N/A N/A -4.7 N/A
Tax Reform Act of 1976 -15.3 -11.9 -7.1 N/A -13.6 N/A
Tax Reduction and Simplification Act of 1977 -17.8 -13.7 -5.8 N/A -15.8 N/A
Revenue Act of 1978 -11.5 -22.8 -26.7 -30.6 -17.2 -22.9
Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act of 1980 13.0 18.4 18.8 21.0 15.7 17.8
Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 -38.3 -91.6 -139.0 -176.7 -65.0 -111.4
Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 17.3 38.3 42.2 52.1 27.8 37.5
Highway Revenue Act of 1982 1.7 3.8 3.9 3.9 2.8 3.3
Social Security Amendments of 1983 6.2 8.8 9.3 11.4 7.5 8.9
Interest and Dividend Tax Compliance Act of 1983 -2.6 -2.4 -2.1 -1.7 -2.5 -2.2
Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 9.3 15.9 21.6 24.6 12.6 17.9
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 0.9 2.7 3.0 3.0 1.8 2.4
Tax Reform Act of 1986 18.6 0.9 -11.7 -9.0 9.8 -0.3
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 9.1 14.3 16.2 15.6 11.7 13.8
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 5.7 3.5 3.6 5.4 4.6 4.6
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 23.2 35.0 31.9 36.5 29.1 31.7
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 24.3 45.3 52.5 65.9 34.8 47.0
Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 -0.6 -0.6 0.1 0.2 -0.6 -0.3
Tax Relief Act of 1997 -9.4 -3.8 -18.6 -20.9 -6.6 -13.2
Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 -34.4 -85.5 -104.0 -103.7 -60.0 -81.9
Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002 -46.0 -27.3 3.8 20.8 -36.7 -12.2
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (normal, 2004-07) -136.6 -78.0 -8.9 -1.4 -107.3 -56.2
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (2003-06) -41.7 -136.6 -78.0 -8.9 -89.1 -66.3
Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968 55.3 15.4 N/A N/A 35.4 N/A
Tax Reform Act of 1969 12.5 7.5 N/A N/A 10.0 N/A
Revenue Act of 1971 -13.2 -19.5 N/A N/A -16.4 N/A
Tax Reduction Act of 1975 -21.9 0.8 N/A N/A -10.5 N/A
Tax Reform Act of 1976 -32.4 -23.8 -13.5 N/A -28.1 N/A
Tax Reduction and Simplification Act of 1977 -35.5 -25.8 -10.3 N/A -30.6 N/A
Revenue Act of 1978 -21.0 -39.0 -43.2 -47.4 -30.0 -37.6
Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act of 1980 19.8 25.7 24.2 25.1 22.8 23.7
Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 -54.9 -123.7 -178.9 -217.2 -89.3 -143.7
Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 23.7 50.0 52.5 61.9 36.8 47.0
Highway Revenue Act of 1982 2.3 5.0 4.9 4.6 3.6 4.2
Social Security Amendments of 1983 8.2 11.1 11.3 13.3 9.7 11.0
Interest and Dividend Tax Compliance Act of 1983 -3.5 -3.0 -2.5 -2.0 -3.2 -2.8
Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 12.0 19.7 25.6 28.1 15.8 21.3
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 1.1 3.2 3.5 3.4 2.2 2.8
Tax Reform Act of 1986 22.4 1.0 -13.1 -9.8 11.7 0.1
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 10.7 16.2 17.7 16.5 13.4 15.3
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 6.2 3.6 3.6 5.2 4.9 4.7
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 24.1 34.9 30.7 33.9 29.5 30.9
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 22.9 41.6 46.9 57.1 32.3 42.1
Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 -0.6 -0.5 0.1 0.1 -0.6 -0.2
Tax Relief Act of 1997 -8.2 -3.3 -15.6 -17.1 -5.7 -11.0
Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 -28.3 -69.1 -82.6 -80.8 -48.7 -65.2
Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002 -37.7 -22.0 3.0 16.2 -29.9 -10.1
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (normal, 2004-07) -110.2 -62.1 -7.0 -1.1 -86.1 -45.1
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (2003-06) -34.2 -110.2 -62.1 -7.0 -72.2 -53.4
17
(CONTINUED)
Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968 1.74 0.45 N/A N/A 1.09 N/A
Tax Reform Act of 1969 0.39 0.21 N/A N/A 0.30 N/A
Revenue Act of 1971 -0.38 -0.50 N/A N/A -0.44 N/A
Tax Reduction Act of 1975 -0.58 0.02 N/A N/A -0.28 N/A
Tax Reform Act of 1976 -0.81 -0.57 -0.30 N/A -0.69 N/A
Tax Reduction and Simplification Act of 1977 -0.85 -0.59 -0.22 N/A -0.72 N/A
Revenue Act of 1978 -0.49 -0.89 -0.95 -0.99 -0.69 -0.83
Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act of 1980 0.44 0.56 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.50
Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 -1.21 -2.60 -3.58 -4.15 -1.91 -2.89
Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 0.53 1.07 1.08 1.23 0.80 0.98
Highway Revenue Act of 1982 0.05 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.09
Social Security Amendments of 1983 0.17 0.22 0.22 0.24 0.20 0.21
Interest and Dividend Tax Compliance Act of 1983 -0.07 -0.06 -0.05 -0.04 -0.07 -0.05
Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 0.24 0.37 0.47 0.49 0.30 0.39
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.05
Tax Reform Act of 1986 0.41 0.02 -0.23 -0.16 0.22 0.01
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 0.19 0.28 0.30 0.27 0.24 0.26
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 0.10 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.07
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 0.41 0.57 0.49 0.52 0.49 0.50
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 0.36 0.64 0.70 0.83 0.50 0.63
Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 -0.01 -0.01 0.00 0.00 -0.01 0.00
Tax Relief Act of 1997 -0.11 -0.04 -0.20 -0.22 -0.08 -0.14
Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 -0.33 -0.77 -0.89 -0.84 -0.55 -0.71
Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002 -0.42 -0.24 0.03 0.16 -0.33 -0.12
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (normal, 2004-07) -1.19 -0.65 -0.07 -0.01 -0.92 -0.48
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (2003-06) -0.38 -1.19 -0.65 -0.07 -0.79 -0.57
Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968 9.4 2.6 N/A N/A 6.0 N/A
Tax Reform Act of 1969 1.9 1.2 N/A N/A 1.6 N/A
Revenue Act of 1971 -2.2 -3.0 N/A N/A -2.6 N/A
Tax Reduction Act of 1975 -3.2 0.1 N/A N/A -1.5 N/A
Tax Reform Act of 1976 -4.1 -2.8 -1.5 N/A -3.5 N/A
Tax Reduction and Simplification Act of 1977 -4.3 -3.2 -1.2 N/A -3.7 N/A
Revenue Act of 1978 -2.5 -4.3 -4.5 -4.5 -3.4 -3.9
Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act of 1980 2.2 2.7 2.4 2.3 2.4 2.4
Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 -5.7 -12.3 -16.5 -18.6 -9.0 -13.3
Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 3.0 6.3 6.3 7.2 4.6 5.7
Highway Revenue Act of 1982 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.5
Social Security Amendments of 1983 0.9 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.2
Interest and Dividend Tax Compliance Act of 1983 -0.4 -0.3 -0.3 -0.2 -0.4 -0.3
Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 1.3 2.0 2.6 2.7 1.7 2.1
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3
Tax Reform Act of 1986 2.3 0.1 -1.2 -0.9 1.2 0.1
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 1.0 1.5 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.4
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 2.2 3.1 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.7
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 2.0 3.5 3.9 4.7 2.7 3.5
Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Tax Relief Act of 1997 -0.6 -0.2 -1.0 -1.1 -0.4 -0.7
Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 -1.7 -3.9 -4.4 -4.2 -2.8 -3.6
Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002 -2.4 -1.3 0.2 0.9 -1.9 -0.7
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (normal, 2004-07) -6.3 -3.4 -0.4 -0.1 -4.8 -2.5
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (2003-06) -2.2 -6.3 -3.4 -0.4 -4.2 -3.1
Figure 1 - Tax Bill Revenue Estimates as a Percentage of GDP, 1940 - 1967
(Full-year effect unless otherwise noted)
4
Percentage of GDP
-2
-4
18
-6
19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19
40 40 41 42 43 43 44 45 48 50 50 51 54 54 62 64 66
a b* a b * a b a b* *
* indicates revenue estimate is for first year after enactment Tax Bill
50
-50
19
-100
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
41
42
44
45
51
62
64
40
40
43
43
48
50
50
54
54
66
a
b*
b*
*
Tax Bill
* indicates revenue estimate is for first year after enactment
4
Percentage of GDP
-2
-4
20
-6
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19 b
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
19
19 a
19 b
19 a
20
20 a
68
69
71
75
76
77
78
80
81
84
85
86
87
89
90
93
96
97
01
02
82
82
83
83
03
03
b
Tax Bill
50
-50
21
-100
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19 b
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
19
19 a
19 b
19 a
20
20 a
68
69
71
75
76
77
78
80
81
84
85
86
87
89
90
93
96
97
01
02
82
82
83
83
03
03
b
Tax Bill